Hickox v. Seegner

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Hickox v. Seegner

101 N.W. 357, 123 Wis. 128, 1904 Wisc. LEXIS 214

DecidedNovember 15, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 101 N.W. 357 (Hickox v. Seegner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hickox v. Seegner, 101 N.W. 357, 123 Wis. 128, 1904 Wisc. LEXIS 214 (Wis. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

Winslow, J.

Tie sole question in this case is as to the proper construction of the clause in the lease which runs thus:

“This lease will expire after three years from October 15, 1899, if the leased property is sold.”

The plaintiffs argue that this clause means that, if the property is sold after three years from October 15, 1899, as in fact it was, the lease will at once expire. The defendant, on ilie other hand, claims that the clause means that, if the property is sold within the three-year period, then the lease will expire at the end of the period. We have no doubt of the correctness of the plaintiffs’ construction. By that construction every word of the sentence is given its natural and usual meaning, and no words are added. The defendant’s construction requires either the insertion of other words, or a change in the order of the words used, or both. In this situation, upon very familiar principles, the plaintiffs’ construction must be adopted.

By the Gourt. — Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Winslow, J.

Tie sole question in this case is as to the proper construction of the clause in the lease which runs thus:

“This lease will expire after three years from October 15, 1899, if the leased property is sold.”

The plaintiffs argue that this clause means that, if the property is sold after three years from October 15, 1899, as in fact it was, the lease will at once expire. The defendant, on ilie other hand, claims that the clause means that, if the property is sold within the three-year period, then the lease will expire at the end of the period. We have no doubt of the correctness of the plaintiffs’ construction. By that construction every word of the sentence is given its natural and usual meaning, and no words are added. The defendant’s construction requires either the insertion of other words, or a change in the order of the words used, or both. In this situation, upon very familiar principles, the plaintiffs’ construction must be adopted.

By the Gourt. — Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 N.W. 357, 123 Wis. 128, 1904 Wisc. LEXIS 214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hickox-v-seegner-wis-1904.